Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Nov. 6, 2019

Sheard v. Lee

Judge
Andrew Carter
Docket
1:18-cv-02125
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
HabeasCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Sheard v. Lee, Judge Carter adopted the magistrate judge’s recommendation, denied habeas relief, and dismissed the case.

Who this affects

David Sheard’s federal habeas petition was denied, the case was dismissed, and the clerk was directed to close the case. William A. Lee was the respondent.

What happened

In Sheard v. Lee, David Sheard asked the court for habeas relief. The opinion says the case was referred to Magistrate Judge Robert W. Lehrburger, who issued a recommendation that the petition be denied and the case dismissed.

Neither side filed objections to the recommendation. The court therefore reviewed the record for clear error rather than conducting a fresh review of the recommendation’s factual and legal conclusions. The opinion does not describe the underlying reasons for recommending denial.

Judge Andrew L. Carter, Jr. found no clear error, adopted the recommendation, denied Sheard’s habeas petition, dismissed the case, and directed the clerk to close it.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Sheard v. Lee · No. 1:18-cv-02125
Judge
Andrew Carter
Date
Nov. 6, 2019

Background

David Sheard commenced this habeas action on March 8, 2018. William A. Lee filed an answer on May 22, 2018. The matter was referred to Magistrate Judge Robert W. Lehrburger.

Sheard later informed Judge Lehrburger that he was filing a motion for a writ of error coram nobis, a request asking a court to correct a fundamental error in a criminal proceeding. The New York State Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department consolidated two such motions filed by Sheard and summarily denied them. Both parties asked the district court not to stay the federal habeas action while Sheard could still seek permission to appeal those denials.

Report and recommendation

On October 7, 2019, Judge Lehrburger recommended that the habeas petition be denied and the case dismissed. The parties were notified that they could object and that failing to object could waive objections and prevent appellate review. No objections were filed.

Because there were no timely objections, the district court reviewed the recommendation for clear error on the face of the record. The opinion states that the court reviewed Judge Lehrburger’s detailed discussion of the law and record and found no clear error. The opinion does not include the recommendation’s underlying merits analysis.

Ruling

Judge Andrew L. Carter, Jr. adopted Judge Lehrburger’s report and recommendation. The court denied Sheard’s habeas petition, dismissed the case, and directed the clerk to close the case. The opinion does not state that the dismissal was with or without prejudice.

Classification

This is a procedural order because the district court resolved the petition by adopting a recommendation under clear-error review without analyzing the underlying habeas question in the opinion.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.